A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Scanning negatives



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old March 16th 18, 05:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Carlos E.R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 153
Default Scanning negatives

On 2018-03-16 15:24, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

but can be compensated.

compensated is the wrong word, and shows your lack of understanding
about basic photography.

what you're calling 'compensated' must be done for *every* photo,
regardless of subject.


Only for light intensity, not hue or temp.

nope. it's trivial to adjust for hue or temp, what experienced
photographers (i.e., not you) call white balance, which can even be
done *after* the photo was taken (without loss).

You are proving that you don't know your subject.

nope. what *you* are doing is showing that you haven't a ****ing clue.


Your opinion and insults are discarded and ignored.


translated: you can't back up your claims. you are wrong and refuse to
admit it.


I don't need to back ours... you do.

--
Cheers, Carlos.
  #82  
Old March 16th 18, 06:09 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default Scanning negatives

On 2018-03-16 12:46:55 +0000, nospam said:

In article , android
wrote:

but that is not a MO that gives you a predictable result.

it's very predictable when done properly.

It can't be done properly for results worthy of pictures taken with
quality equipment.

it can.

no you've stared to resort to lying per reflex again.

nope


Oki... Thanks for proving me right!


i didn't.


you did for sure, don't be so overly modest!

--

teleportation kills

  #83  
Old March 16th 18, 06:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Scanning negatives

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

but can be compensated.

compensated is the wrong word, and shows your lack of understanding
about basic photography.

what you're calling 'compensated' must be done for *every* photo,
regardless of subject.


Only for light intensity, not hue or temp.

nope. it's trivial to adjust for hue or temp, what experienced
photographers (i.e., not you) call white balance, which can even be
done *after* the photo was taken (without loss).

You are proving that you don't know your subject.

nope. what *you* are doing is showing that you haven't a ****ing clue.

Your opinion and insults are discarded and ignored.


translated: you can't back up your claims. you are wrong and refuse to
admit it.


I don't need to back ours...


yes you do if you want to claim i'm wrong.

simply saying i'm wrong ain't gonna cut it.

you do.


i did, as have countless photographers going back many decades.

you haven't a clue and refuse to learn.
  #84  
Old March 16th 18, 06:36 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Carlos E.R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 153
Default Scanning negatives

On 2018-03-16 18:17, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

but can be compensated.

compensated is the wrong word, and shows your lack of understanding
about basic photography.

what you're calling 'compensated' must be done for *every* photo,
regardless of subject.


Only for light intensity, not hue or temp.

nope. it's trivial to adjust for hue or temp, what experienced
photographers (i.e., not you) call white balance, which can even be
done *after* the photo was taken (without loss).

You are proving that you don't know your subject.

nope. what *you* are doing is showing that you haven't a ****ing clue.

Your opinion and insults are discarded and ignored.

translated: you can't back up your claims. you are wrong and refuse to
admit it.


I don't need to back ours...


yes you do if you want to claim i'm wrong.

simply saying i'm wrong ain't gonna cut it.


And _we_ say you are wrong. Not I, but we.


you do.


i did, as have countless photographers going back many decades.


Prove it.

Here it is only you supporting that claim.

you haven't a clue and refuse to learn.


I'm still waiting for your link supporting the X7 is crap.

--
Cheers, Carlos.
  #85  
Old March 16th 18, 06:42 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Scanning negatives

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Your opinion and insults are discarded and ignored.

translated: you can't back up your claims. you are wrong and refuse to
admit it.

I don't need to back ours...


yes you do if you want to claim i'm wrong.

simply saying i'm wrong ain't gonna cut it.


And _we_ say you are wrong. Not I, but we.


prove it. you can't, because i'm not wrong.

you do.


i did, as have countless photographers going back many decades.


Prove it.


i explained it several times.

you aren't interested in a discussion, nor are you interested in
learning anything.
  #86  
Old March 16th 18, 09:23 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Carlos E.R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 153
Default Scanning negatives

On 2018-03-16 18:42, nospam wrote:
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Your opinion and insults are discarded and ignored.

translated: you can't back up your claims. you are wrong and refuse to
admit it.

I don't need to back ours...

yes you do if you want to claim i'm wrong.

simply saying i'm wrong ain't gonna cut it.


And _we_ say you are wrong. Not I, but we.


prove it. you can't, because i'm not wrong.

you do.

i did, as have countless photographers going back many decades.


Prove it.


i explained it several times.

you aren't interested in a discussion, nor are you interested in
learning anything.


Clearly you can not prove your point, and you are the single person
claiming it. The onus is on you. You have a known record of saying
things that are false, so *we* do not believe you.

Every expert knows that using the sun light to copy slides or negatives
is not reliable and needs changing compensations, so every expert uses a
fixed setup with artificial light and recommends that.

Only you support using the sun as good and easy and reliable. Only when
cornered you recognize that compensation is needed.

End of discussion.


And I'm still waiting for your link supporting that the X7 is crap...



--
Cheers, Carlos.
  #87  
Old March 16th 18, 09:31 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,085
Default Scanning negatives

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Prove it.


i explained it several times.

you aren't interested in a discussion, nor are you interested in
learning anything.


Clearly you can not prove your point,


i have, and more than one occasion.

and you are the single person
claiming it.


nope. anyone who knows even a little bit about photography and has
actually done it agrees with me, not you.

The onus is on you. You have a known record of saying
things that are false,


i never say things that are false. ever.

so *we* do not believe you.


i don't give a **** what you or anyone else believes.

what matters is what the facts are, which are as i said.

Every expert knows that using the sun light to copy slides or negatives
is not reliable and needs changing compensations, so every expert uses a
fixed setup with artificial light and recommends that.


appeal to the masses logical fallacy.

you're also lying about what i said.

furthermore, you don't realize that *every* photo needs what you
erroneously call compensation, including ones with artificial light.

unfortunately, it's well beyond your understanding, so you resort to
insults.

Only you support using the sun as good and easy and reliable. Only when
cornered you recognize that compensation is needed.


i never said it wasn't.

as usual, you lie about what i said.

End of discussion.


if only.

And I'm still waiting for your link supporting that the X7 is crap...


what for? you'll argue no matter what i say.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
scanning old negatives Phillip Helbig[_2_] Digital Photography 23 May 29th 15 06:49 AM
Scanning old negatives Stuart Digital Photography 17 April 20th 07 05:53 AM
Help scanning negatives, please! iamcanadian 35mm Photo Equipment 12 December 3rd 06 03:32 AM
scanning negatives Mike - EMAIL IGNORED 35mm Photo Equipment 12 November 27th 04 08:31 AM
Lab for Scanning Negatives..... ron 35mm Photo Equipment 3 October 14th 04 05:30 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.